In the last decade, researchers have shown that MNCs need to reverse knowledge transfer to secure their competitiveness in the global market. Lately this has been studied through re/expatriates. This study presents two exemplary cases from a study of 64 interviews conducted in 5 of the largest Danish MNCs. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, to understand the role identity work plays in the ability and willingness of expatriates to learn and transfer knowledge. Second, to introduce Life Course Theory as an important methodological contribution with which to capture the entangled relationship between agency and structure within reverse knowledge transfer. Third, to develop and extend the current theoretical and methodological frame that govern the research of knowledge transfer. The present study indicates that institutionally generated organisational frames and work organising practices develop and feed certain power structures and communities, which influence the possibility of agency and as a result reverse knowledge transfer. The findings of this study stress that: 1) power is as an important productive force in identity work: consequently, it has the ability both to hinder and spur the processes of transformative learning and reverse knowledge transfer; 2) reverse knowledge transfer can be hindered by the lack of transformative learning in the single individual.
The empirical material in this paper has been collected in the research project ”Cultural Intelligence as a Strategic Resource”. The project was funded by the Danish Strategic Research Council and conducted by Lisbeth Clausen, Liv Egholm Feldt, Martine Cardel Gertsen, Anne-Marie Søderberg, Verner Worm and Mette Zølner, Copenhagen Business School, Denmark. The research team have had privileged access to five of the largest Danish MNCs. While the collection of material has in general been carried out by the research team, Liv Egholm Feldt is the only person responsible for the analysis, reflections and perspectives presented in this paper. To secure the anonymity of the interviewees, fictitious names have been used.

One of the paradoxes of the past few decades has been the continuity and even growth of infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) despite the loud voices of critics and harsh judgments of some academics. Indeed, there is little doubt about the success of PPPs judging on the basis of increasing global interest, the frequency of use in countries such as the United Kingdom or Australia, or by the spectacular delivery of timely new infrastructure. There has been considerable work undertaken to date on the multiple meanings of PPP more generally, on the multiple disciplinary languages spoken by commentators and on the evaluation challenges faced by those interested in assessing PPPs as projects or activities. There has been less work undertaken, however, on the meanings given to how PPP has been judged as ‘successful’ by implementing governments. Indeed, the criteria on which governments might judge PPP as a success story seems to be inherently ambiguous and as politically oriented as it is oriented towards more traditional utilitarian policy goals concerned with project delivery or efficiency. In view of the continuity of PPPs post-GFC, the very nature of ‘PPP success’ needs serious rethinking.
This paper explores the notion of ‘success’ for PPP and argues that short of embarrassing and large scale corruption or widespread incompetence, PPP and PPP projects are inevitably judged as ‘successful’ in government. This is not only because the PPP concept itself is so wonderfully amorphous and ambiguous, but because each strand of PPP has multiple goals. Infrastructure PPPs for example, have fifteen or so different goals. The criteria for success are therefore multi-faceted and themselves incorporate the very goals of government itself. It is inevitable that PPPs are seen by government to help create public value as well as private value. The paper uses theories of policy success and evaluation studies to assess how ‘success’ is interpreted. The paper concludes that many of the claims for PPP success and failure are therefore, to an extent, self defining exercises.

Files in this item: 1

Policy processes in transnational settings are shaped by actors whose approval and consent are required for reform to take place. These ‘transnational veto players’ frame and delimit policy options. The concept of ‘transnational veto players’ is developed through an empirical analysis of global reforms in the regulatory treatment of large financial institutions deemed ‘too big to fail’. Actors debating and developing policy on ‘too big to fail’ may have formal defined constituencies, as regulators, academics or lobbying organisations, but in their transnational interactions they are also informed by a diffuse constituency of peers through their multiple associations within policy communities. These interactions determine which policy ideas are permissible and how they are adopted. The ‘too big to fail’ case shows how reform activity to curtail the risks posed by large financial institutions may also inadvertently strengthen their position as transnational veto players.

This paper examines the transparency of public-private partnerships (PPPs). The key question is “How has transparency and accountability been implemented in PPPs?”.PPPs in infrastructure have been presented as enabling synergy and as a major alternative to previous contracting out techniques. These partnerships have most usually involved the preferential use of private finance, highly complex ‘bundled’ infrastructure delivery contract arrangements and new governance and accountability assumptions. Risk management is also particularly important to PPPs. Contracts between the governments and partnering private firms, however, have also been more complex and have not necessarily lead to simple synergy, but to more negotiations and governance structures. One ongoing concern from critics has been the accusation of illegitimacy due to the use by governments of these contracts to hold project information secret, rather than providing details of the deals to citizens. This paper first presents the transparency concept as it relates to modern day infrastructure PPPs. Second, the paper discusses how transparency and PPPs are related, and suggests a typology of transparency based on degree on openness and phases of the PPP process. Third, the paper examines empirical evidence on transparency elements in PPP contracts and governance structures based on two cases from Scandinavia and Australia. Fourth, the paper concludes by observing how different transparency dimensions relate to the different phases in a PPP project, including the important point about the contract institution that defines a PPP. The paper also concludes by suggesting some ways forward to improve transparency in future PPPs to enhance legitimacy.

Files in this item: 1

Government Policies on Corporate Social Responsibility in Denmark and the UK

Brown, Danna; Steen Knudsen, Jette(, 2012)

[More information]

[Less information]

Abstract:

Do government policies on CSR in the UK and Denmark reflect distinct domestic political-economic institutional differences as predicted by the Varieties of Capitalism approach, or do they display new forms of governance that primarily address the needs of global businesses? We move beyond the management literature and the literature on public management of particular environmental and sustainability programs to explore a broader government agenda for CSR through a political science lens. We develop a set of expectations that follow from the literature on domestic institutions as well as from the literature that takes into account the role of governments in interaction with transnational actors. We find evidence for a substitution objective in the initial CSR programs of the Danish and British governments (and a mirror objective in Denmark). However, we also find that globalization has motivated governments to use their regulatory authorities pertaining to CSR policies for purposes beyond enhancement of welfare state functions.

Files in this item: 1

This paper aims to take stock of the concept of New Public Management (NPM) to see what has happened with the concept, and to consider recent concepts and ideas that challenge NPM. The reason is that there is still much talk about NPM, although many now seem to think that we have gone “beyond” NPM or are in a “post-NPM” public management situation. The second part of the paper will deal with self-styled conceptual alternatives to NPM. These began to appear in the last decade. With “self-styled” I mean that they explicitly present themselves as alternatives to NPM and address the shortcomings in NPM to promote other conceptualizations. Combined, these alternatives approach a coherent research agenda. To be able to discuss these matters, the argument is presented through a theoretical approach that views public management reform as institutional change. This approach is now common in public management reform studies (Pollitt & Bouckaert 2004; Christensen & Lægreid, 2001, 2007, 2011), Knill (1999) and Barzelay (2001) and colleagues (Barzelay & Gallego 2010). The analytical framework comes from theories of public policymaking and theories of historical institutionalism in political science.